1 of 2
1
DNA and race
Posted: 29 March 2012 12:30 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

Ok, I thought this was really revealing. You do NOT have to watch the whole 54 minutes. Just go to 49:50 and listen for 4 minutes. LINK

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 March 2012 01:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11

Yes, this is one of my complaints about the program. Dr Gates speaks with an air of certainty, which doesn’t real exist. There has not been enough sampling of the diverse populations for that amount of certainty. I wouldn’t be surprised (for instance) if there were people of African descent from diverse parts of the diaspora belonging to a group of Africans no longer in existence there. This is a new and evolving technology, and should be treated as such. GEDMATCH recently recalibrated its autosomal tables, and I would lose respect for them if this were not done as an ongoing project.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 March 2012 01:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

I just thought Duster did a great job explaining that any random group will have markers making that group “special” even though the group is just a random bunch. That’s a good thing to keep in mind with some of these studies.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 March 2012 01:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11
traveler - 29 March 2012 01:19 PM

I just thought Duster did a great job explaining that any random group will have markers making that group “special” even though the group is just a random bunch. That’s a good thing to keep in mind with some of these studies.

Yes, I totally agree… I only listened to the last 4 min. I plan to listen to the rest soon! Thanks for the post.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 11:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2011-06-17

Yes, I always thought there was something wrong with those AIMs. I had that test done and it came back 82% European, 10% Sub-Saharan African, 6% South East Asia, and 2% Native American (Statistically Irrelevent). Yet I have also done Extensive research on my Ancestors and I can’t for the life of me find any African or Asian people. Although two of my 2-3x Great granparents owned slaves.

The point being that these AIMs represent a large % of a certain population not necessarily 100% of a population. For example one AIM could be found in 90% of some African population (sample size 900 or some figure like that) and only 10% in European populations. But 10% of the ‘European population’ is alot of freaking people.

I remember seeing somewhere a list of these AIMs and their frequencies within certain populations but alas I do not remember where nor was I aware of it when I sent for the test.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 11:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9284
Joined  2006-08-29

Not sure why (although I have an idea) people would want to listen to a sociologist explaining genetics. If your genetic sequencing showed 6% of your genome came from South East Asia, then that’s exactly what it means.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 11:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2011-06-17
George - 30 March 2012 11:25 AM

Not sure why (although I have an idea) people would want to listen to a sociologist explaining genetics. If your genetic sequencing showed 6% of your genome came from South East Asia, then that’s exactly what it means.

No, It means that 6% of the AIMs tested for (in my test 270 - others are now using tens of thousands) were marked as coming from S.E. Asian populations. But that is not based on those markers being 100% from S.E. Asia. Those markers might be found at lower % in other populations. I do not think there is ONE AIM that is 100% (except very rare ones which are rare even within a small population). I may have it all wrong but something does not add-up.

[ Edited: 30 March 2012 11:42 AM by VeridicusMaximus ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 12:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9284
Joined  2006-08-29

This is simply nonsense. How many Norwegians do you think have the genes to give them dark skin found in Sub-Saharan Africa? Even the light skin of Asians is a product of completely different genes from the ones found in Europeans. Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 12:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9284
Joined  2006-08-29

As far as AIMs are concerned, yes, those are mere estimates. It’s cheaper and faster (and sufficiently reliable) than sequencing the whole genome. I am not really sure what Duster’s problem is, but, then, I don’t really care.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 12:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11
George - 30 March 2012 12:03 PM

This is simply nonsense. How many Norwegians do you think have the genes to give them dark skin found in Sub-Saharan Africa? Even the light skin of Asians is a product of completely different genes from the ones found in Europeans. Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

Not every gene codes for color….

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 01:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
George - 30 March 2012 12:03 PM

Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

Genes don’t separate people. People separate people. smile

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 01:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2011-06-17
George - 30 March 2012 12:03 PM

This is simply nonsense. How many Norwegians do you think have the genes to give them dark skin found in Sub-Saharan Africa? Even the light skin of Asians is a product of completely different genes from the ones found in Europeans. Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

Were not talking about genes but SNPs. I do not think anyone is saying these tests are useless only misleading. If 99% of sub-saharan Africans have a certain marker and only 1% of all Europeans tested have the same marker - that still does not necessitate an African Ancestor some generartions back that I woudl have to go and travel to African in order to meet my cousins. 1% of 500,000,000 people is still 5,000,000 people that would have this marker that are non African. How the hell do they know I did not come from one of their ancestors. It is based on frequencies and if the frequency can not be 100% over a large sample then there is not reason to suggest that it is absolutely so.

I undestand that if you have 10 such markers that this would increase the likelyhood but even then there is no necessity and absoluteness that is often presented on shows like those of Gates. If I am missing something I do not see it - help me out?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9284
Joined  2006-08-29

I imagine the marker looks at more than one nucleotide, no?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 03:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2799
Joined  2011-11-04
traveler - 30 March 2012 01:12 PM
George - 30 March 2012 12:03 PM

Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

Genes don’t separate people. People separate people. smile

Very nice come back.  More tangentially, how about?:  You can have my genes when you pry them from my cold dead cells.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 07:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  229
Joined  2010-02-20
George - 30 March 2012 12:03 PM

This is simply nonsense. How many Norwegians do you think have the genes to give them dark skin found in Sub-Saharan Africa? Even the light skin of Asians is a product of completely different genes from the ones found in Europeans. Those genes that separate people into different races are unique to those races only.

That is hard to say.  The gene might still be present, simply prevented from expression.  Evolution doesn’t necessarily delete a gene, sometimes it switches them off.

 Signature 

“The present age ... prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, fancy to reality, the appearance to the essence ... for in these days illusion only is sacred, truth profane.”

Feuerbach

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 March 2012 10:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2588
Joined  2011-04-24
George - 30 March 2012 11:25 AM

Not sure why (although I have an idea) people would want to listen to a sociologist explaining genetics. If your genetic sequencing showed 6% of your genome came from South East Asia, then that’s exactly what it means.

Very well put; sociology is only one cut above astrology in terms of pseudoscience.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1